Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41051697›Full record

ArticleDiabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders2025

Effect of Automated Insulin Delivery System Therapy at Diagnosis on Metabolic Control in Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes.

Ugur Cem Yilmaz, Günay Demir, Deniz Özalp Kızılay, Samim Özen, Damla Gökşen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Ugur Cem YilmazDepartment of Pediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes, Faculty of Medicine, Ege University, İzmir, Turkey. cmylmz12@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5878-5731
Günay DemirDepartment of Pediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes, Faculty of Medicine, Ege University, İzmir, Turkey.
Deniz Özalp KızılayDepartment of Pediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes, Faculty of Medicine, Ege University, İzmir, Turkey.
Samim ÖzenDepartment of Pediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes, Faculty of Medicine, Ege University, İzmir, Turkey.
Damla GökşenDepartment of Pediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes, Faculty of Medicine, Ege University, İzmir, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe primary goal of managing type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D) is to achieve glycemic control and prevent both acute and chronic complications. In recent years, automated insulin delivery (AID) systems, such as the 780G AID system, have significantly improved glycemic control and patient safety. Despite being the most advanced treatment option, AID initiation is often delayed until the honeymoon stage (partial remission phase). This study evaluated the impact of initiating MiniMed™ 780G at diagnosis on metabolic control and glycemic metrics in children newly diagnosed with T1D. It compares early AID initiation with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and multiple daily injection (MDI) therapy over a 1-year follow-up period.

methodsThis retrospective study included children and adolescents (age range 0.87-17.72 years) newly diagnosed with T1D between January 2023 and August 2024. Ten patients who were initiated on AID therapy at diagnosis were included, with eight patients completing a 1-year follow-up. Data from these eight patients and seven patients on CGM + MDI therapy were analyzed at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months.

resultsThe mean age at diagnosis was 6.98 ± 3.22 years (0.87-9.82) for the AID group and 9.77 ± 4.89 years (3.70-17.72) for the CGM + MDI group (p = 0.14). The AID system was initiated at an average of 3.33 ± 7.73 days (2-23) after diagnosis, while sensor use in the CGM + MDI group began an average of 17.37 ± 8.86 days (1-29) after diagnosis. At 12 months, mean hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was 6.10% (43 mmol/mol) in the AID group compared with 7.73% (61 mmol/mol) in the CGM + MDI group. Time in range (TIR) was 79.0% vs. 50.7%, and time above range (TAR) was 13.4% vs. 30.7%, based on 2-week CGM data prior to the 12-month visit (p = 0.02, p = 0.009, p = 0.02). No case of diabetic ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycemia was reported during the follow-up period.

conclusionThis study highlights the potential benefits of initiating AID therapy at the time of diagnosis, offering novel insights into its safety and efficacy in the early management of T1D. These findings suggest that early initiation of AID therapy at the time of diagnosis is feasible and may improve glycemic outcomes.

Indexed as

Advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) systemAutomated insulin deliveryGlycemic controlPediatric endocrinologyType 1 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID41051697
PMCPMC12579011

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.